本文選題：交通事故損害賠償 + 交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)　； 參考：《湖南師范大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：2012年頒布的《最高院關(guān)于審理道路交通事故損害賠償案件適用法律若干問(wèn)題的解釋》(以下簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)《解釋》)引來(lái)了對(duì)保險(xiǎn)公司在交通事故損害賠償案件(以下簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)交損案件)中訴訟地位的新一輪討論。一直以來(lái),對(duì)于我國(guó)法律法規(guī)是否明確規(guī)定了受害第三人對(duì)保險(xiǎn)公司享有直接請(qǐng)求權(quán)存在許多的爭(zhēng)議,因此,保險(xiǎn)公司在交損案件中的訴訟地位也是法律理論界和司法實(shí)踐中的研究焦點(diǎn)�！督忉尅返念C布雖然在司法實(shí)踐上統(tǒng)一了保險(xiǎn)公司的訴訟地位,但是,過(guò)去立法上規(guī)定不明確、共同訴訟形態(tài)不能滿足保險(xiǎn)公司作為交損案件中共同被告的理論需要等問(wèn)題仍存在。對(duì)于受害第三人的直接請(qǐng)求權(quán)應(yīng)當(dāng)在《道路交通安全法》等法律中作出明確的規(guī)定,但是在相關(guān)的法律中要么對(duì)其并沒(méi)有規(guī)定,要么是附有條件的規(guī)定,這顯然不能使保險(xiǎn)公司作為交損案件中的共同被告得到法律上的支持�？v觀其他國(guó)家對(duì)受害第三人直接請(qǐng)求權(quán)的規(guī)定,都是通過(guò)強(qiáng)制保險(xiǎn)制度的相關(guān)法律作出了明確規(guī)定,并且,明確作出規(guī)定也是對(duì)受害第三人權(quán)益的保護(hù),也使保險(xiǎn)公司在交損案件中作為共同被告有了立法上的支持。因此,我國(guó)立法上對(duì)于受害第三人直接請(qǐng)求權(quán)的規(guī)定還有待完善。除此之外,還應(yīng)當(dāng)結(jié)合民事訴訟中共同訴訟的理論分析保險(xiǎn)公司作為共同被告的可能性,從借鑒外國(guó)共同訴訟制度的規(guī)定,完善我國(guó)共同訴訟形態(tài)以適用于交損案件中。從理論上對(duì)保險(xiǎn)公司訴訟地位進(jìn)行分析,同時(shí)立足于審理對(duì)象的多樣性,探討了出現(xiàn)這種現(xiàn)象的原因,同時(shí)對(duì)完善我國(guó)保險(xiǎn)公司在交損案件中訴訟地位的相關(guān)制度提出了建議。
[Abstract]:The Supreme Court's interpretation of certain issues of applicable Law in handling cases of compensation for damages caused by Road Traffic Accidents (hereinafter referred to as "interpretation") issued in 2012 has led to cases of compensation for damages by insurance companies in traffic accidents (hereinafter referred to as "referred to below). A new round of discussions on the status of litigation. There have been many disputes over whether the third party who is injured has the right of direct claim against the insurance company, therefore, there are many disputes about whether the laws and regulations of our country explicitly stipulate the right of direct claim to the insurance company. The litigation status of the insurance company in the case of loss is also the focus of research in the field of legal theory and judicial practice. Although the promulgation of "explanation" unifies the litigation status of the insurance company in judicial practice, the legislative provisions in the past are not clear. The joint action form can not meet the theoretical needs of the insurance company as a joint defendant in the case of loss, and so on. The direct claim of a third injured person should be clearly defined in laws such as the Road Traffic Safety Law, but it is either not provided for in the relevant law or is subject to conditions, This clearly does not give the insurance company legal support as a co-defendant in a loss case. Throughout other countries, the provisions on the direct claim of the injured third party are clearly stipulated through the relevant laws of the compulsory insurance system, and the explicit provisions are also the protection of the rights and interests of the injured third party. It also gives the insurance company legislative support as a co-defendant in a loss case. Therefore, the legislation of our country for the injured third party direct claim is still to be improved. In addition, we should combine the theory of joint action in civil action to analyze the possibility of insurance company as co-defendant, and perfect the form of joint action in our country in order to apply to the case of loss of payment from the reference of the provisions of foreign joint action system. This paper analyzes the litigation status of insurance companies theoretically, and probes into the causes of this phenomenon based on the diversity of trial objects. At the same time, it puts forward some suggestions on how to perfect the relevant system of litigation status of insurance companies in the case of loss.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D925.1;D922.14

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 李敏;;論機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)交通事故責(zé)任的歸責(zé)原則與責(zé)任的承擔(dān)[J];寧夏大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年03期

2 王景龍;石井川;馮石亮;;道路交通事故損害賠償新《解釋》亮點(diǎn)多[J];老友;2013年03期

3 胡丹;;淺析道路交通事故損害賠償中保險(xiǎn)公司的訴訟地位[J];企業(yè)導(dǎo)報(bào);2012年13期

4 劉家安;;機(jī)動(dòng)車(chē)交通事故責(zé)任的歸責(zé)原則及責(zé)任歸屬[J];政治與法律;2010年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：2092302